Is Martyr the Correct Word?

by Bob Randall

(Editor's Note:  As my good friend, Ranger Bob, explains in this post, he has concerns regarding my use of the word "martyr" in reference to Luigi Mangione, the young man who shot on insurance company CEO to death on a busy street in Manhattan last December.  He sent his thoughts to me in a personal email, and  I respected what he had to say to the point that I asked him to resubmit it as a posting for this blog.  While I still feel that the federal government's response to this particular crime will serve to increase the shooter's notoriety and support among some members of the reading public, I agree with Ranger Bob in that "martyr" was not the ideal term.  "Folk hero" would have been a more accurate description of Luigi's rising status within the general public. 

The post to which my friend is responding is "Bondi Moves to Ensure Luigi's Martyrdom" which ran in this blog on April 5th.  Thanks for sending your critique along, Ranger Bob.  I always appreciate feedback and knowing that someone is taking the time to read what I have written!  -  Pa Rock)

 

Recently, Pa Rock posted about Luigi Mangeoni’s martyrdom. Remember him? Luigi, not Pa Rock.  Rock and I have exchanged emails concerning the use of the word “martyrdom.”   I told him that I disagree with that label. He asked me to make this post.

So what is a martyr? There is probably more than one way to define it. Google: “A martyr is someone who willingly … endures great suffering for a … cause.”   L is not a martyr because he is not suffering for his belief in a cause.  We can agree that he probably committed acts for his beliefs, but it is for his acts that he is being prosecuted.  If I believe that the American health insurance system is bad, I still do not have a right to murder anyone who is involved with that industry. BTW I do believe it is flawed. 

L is being prosecuted for his actions. He is an alleged murderer. Therefore, he is not a martyr in NY.  I think it is appropriate that he should be prosecuted for 1st degree murder in the state of NY’s courts under state charges. If he is adjudicated guilty, I suppose that a life sentence would be appropriate, but I’m not on the jury.  That wouldn’t make him a martyr. 

Is he a martyr because of the federal prosecution? Legally, he is a defendant in a federal murder charge (I’m not sure that is final yet) and that doesn’t make him a martyr.  Of course, the feds don't have to prosecute him, they could just leave it to the state. 

I had to look up the federal jurisdiction of the Brian Thompson murder. I can remember when murder was not a federal crime.  Remember the JFK assassination?  I found a couple of things that push it into fed law. I won’t look it up again but it says something like murder done while in violation of a federal law is a federal crime. It also says murder with a firearm is a federal crime. The double charges in state and federal courts are not double jeopardy since there are separate laws and jurisdictions involved. None of this makes L a martyr.

Is it the death penalty that makes him a martyr?  No, if the murder had taken place in Texas, he would still not be a martyr just because of the potential death penalty.  Whether you believe the death penalty is good or bad has no bearing on this point. Is it the way the death penalty is being applied that makes him a martyr? Well, people were calling him a martyr before the feds jumped in vowing to execute him. 

It does seem like the only reason the feds are pursuing it is to bring in the death penalty.  So, you might argue, as his attorneys are, that the feds didn’t follow certain protocols and violated Mangione’s due process rights. That is probably a valid argument but it doesn't make L a martyr. I read that AG Pam Bondi said it was because it was an act of political terrorism. I hate to agree with her but it fits into my definition of domestic political terrorism. Are they pursuing the case to make a political point of being tough on crime? I suspect that’s part of it.  I note here that neither the State of Texas nor the feds are pursuing the death penalty against the white supremacist mass murderer in a Texas Walmart. The Texas prosecutor said it was because the victims' families didn't want it. The feds haven't said why they weren't pursuing the death penalty.  There is a smell of Trumpian persecution of his perceived enemy, but it's only a smell unless you can prove it. 

There is no justification for Brian Thompson’s murder.  I cannot assign martyrdom to a murderer. I suggest a different label: L is a folk hero, albeit because of misplaced values. Martyrdom has too much of a positive association for his crimes. Folk heroes can be either positive or negative. L is more of a Jesse James than a Joan of Arc. 

There are plenty of reasons to argue that the Trump administration is a disaster, but don't try to bring Luigi up to a martyr status as a talking point.  Argue that the death penalty is unconscionable, argue that it isn't being applied evenly, argue that the commercialization of health care is flawed. You can do that without the hysterics of martyrdom. Bringing up a martyr and trying to justify it will just bring down the effectiveness of your arguments. The only people who will care will be those in the choir who are singing with you. The other side won't hear your argument, you will be handing them a straw man to diminish what you are trying to say.

I don't think I'm being picky.  I'm trying to moderate the perspective.

PS  I asked Google about it and it came up with an AI answer similar to mine. If the Secretary of Education is reading this, it is AI for artificial intelligence, not A-1, which is a sauce.